'Hundreds join' settler violence

[questionmark]

'Hundreds join' settler violence

Hundreds of settlers are engaged in violence against Palestinians and Israeli soldiers, the senior Israeli commander in the West Bank has said.

Majr-Gen Gadi Shamni said diverting military resources to deal with settlers impaired the army's ability to carry out operations against militants.

A recent UN report recorded 222 acts of settler violence in the first half of 2008 compared with 291 in all of 2007.

Palestinians have long complained of settler harassment and intimidation.

They have also complained the Israeli military does little to stop or restrain the settlers.

'Significant change'

"In the past, only a few dozen individuals took part in such activity but today that number has grown into the hundreds. That's a very significant change," Maj-Gen Shamni told the Israeli Haaretz newspaper.

"These hundreds are engaged in conspiratorial actions against Palestinians and the security forces. It's a very grave phenomenon."

"This is harming our ability to carry out security missions in the territories. We have to divert our efforts to there from other issues.

"The margins [in the settler community] are expanding, because they are enjoying a tailwind and the backing of part of the leadership, both rabbinical and public, whether in explicit statements or tacitly."

The general said that in some cases Israeli soldiers who had intervened to stop settlers from attacking Palestinians had themselves been attacked by settlers.

"The majority [of settlers] here act normally. We're talking about a hard core of a few hundred activists," Maj-Gen Shamni said.

Full story, source: BBC

[louie]

I never really understood what was going on over there, and why so many other countrys are involved.

[Moon Monkey]

The nutters are getting restless because they know it is only a matter of time before they are dragged kicking and screaming from their caravans.

[stevewinn]

This land, the land the Palestinians want back, is this the land they lost in the war?

[questionmark]

This land, the land the Palestinians want back, is this the land they lost in the war?

Depends how you see it...the Palestinians lost nothing, but the Egyptians, Syrians and Jordanians did. They left a population there, which -in most part- we now refer to as Palestinians.

Israel now has two options: keep the land and give those that live there full citizenship rights (which is what the rules of war call for) or give the land and its inhabitants back. The first option would convert Israel into a mostly Islamic country.

[Moon Monkey]

Depends how you see it...the Palestinians lost nothing, but the Egyptians, Syrians and Jordanians did. They left a population there, which -in most part- we now refer to as Palestinians.

Israel now has two options: keep the land and give those that live there full citizenship rights (which is what the rules of war call for) or give the land and its inhabitants back. The first option would convert Israel into a mostly Islamic country.

The Egyptians didn't want Gaza back in the '79 accords, I was talking to a couple of Egyptian army officers recently and the feeling is still the same, and the Jordanians didn't want the West Bank back in '94, in fact it supposedly took King Hussein a few minutes to compose himself he was laughing so hard. The Syrians want the Golan back but a state of war still exists between Israel/Syria so that could take a while.

Pull out settlers (or leave them there for palestinian 'governing' ), build a big strong wall ( and a moat and fill it with crocodiles ) and split Jerusalem in two. Any land appropiated in building the wall and the big settlements that straddle the two countries should be paid for in rent or land elsewhere. Then have no contact whatsoever, entry and exit can be to and through Egypt and Jordan its only a five minute boat ride from Sanai to Aquaba...easier than passing through israeli checkpoints.

Edited October 2, 2008 by Moon Monkey

[stevewinn]

Depends how you see it...the Palestinians lost nothing, but the Egyptians, Syrians and Jordanians did. They left a population there, which -in most part- we now refer to as Palestinians.

Israel now has two options: keep the land and give those that live there full citizenship rights (which is what the rules of war call for) or give the land and its inhabitants back. The first option would convert Israel into a mostly Islamic country.

Egypt Syria and Jordan left the Palestinians in the ****. Its a shame Israel back in the day didn't push the Palestinian people across the border into Egypt Jordan and Syria and then declare the territory has the spoils of war.

[questionmark]

Egypt Syria and Jordan left the Palestinians in the ****. Its a shame Israel back in the day didn't push the Palestinian people across the border into Egypt Jordan and Syria and then declare the territory has the spoils of war.

That happens to be a war crime.

[1.618]

That happens to be a war crime.

Maybe so but it would have saved a lot of trouble.

[questionmark]

Maybe so but it would have saved a lot of trouble.

... and Adolf would have gotten a monument...

[questionmark]

The Egyptians didn't want Gaza back in the '79 accords, I was talking to a couple of Egyptian army officers recently and the feeling is still the same, and the Jordanians didn't want the West Bank back in '94, in fact it supposedly took King Hussein a few minutes to compose himself he was laughing so hard. The Syrians want the Golan back but a state of war still exists between Israel/Syria so that could take a while.

Well, would you want them? Why should they?

And I totally agree with you an the rest, the error was made over 60 years ago so there is no way back now.

[revolucion]

I dont believe anyone wants this war to end, as far as the people involved in it are concerned. So much money is poured into the Israli war machine that there is a strange reason why there is still a war, rather than just building a wall. It will be interesting to see if this war ever comes to a resolve. From where Im standing it is the Isralis in the wrong...

[revolucion]

I dont believe anyone wants this war to end, as far as the people involved in it are concerned. So much money is poured into the Israli war machine that there is a strange reason why there is still a war, rather than just building a wall. It will be interesting to see if this war ever comes to a resolve. From where Im standing it is the Isralis in the wrong...

[MasterPo]

Never forget that in '48. '67 and '72 the arabs told their brotheren to leave their homes else they may get hurt when their armies come through to push the Jews into the sea.

Problem was: The arabs lost the wars badly!! So they left their homes and lands voluntarily.

[Guardsman Bass]

Never forget that in '48. '67 and '72 the arabs told their brotheren to leave their homes else they may get hurt when their armies come through to push the Jews into the sea.

Problem was: The arabs lost the wars badly!! So they left their homes and lands voluntarily.

Some of them did in 1948, but that was it. Another powerful motivator for them to leave was events like the Deir Yessin Massacre in the 1948 War.

Israelis who aren't in complete denial over the Palestinian issue should be more worried about this. The settlers are making it increasingly difficult to pull out from the West Bank, since they are not only politically active, but they are also generally armed (not enough to challenge the IDF, but enough to make a politically unacceptable scene). You know what that means? That means that at some point, the Palestinians in the West Bank are going to say "**** it", and start pushing for a one-state solution where they get equal citizenship rights in Greater Israel. Olmert has more or less said the same thing.

[Pandora.]

I've been 'observing' this conflict pretty much all my adult life, with alternating feelings of hope, disgust, disbelief & despair. But now it has turned mostly into *shakes head in helpless sadness* and I've given up hope I'll see a resolution in my lifetime.

The continous tit-for-tat of atrocities has generated so much deeply ingrained hatred and sense of injustice on both sides, it will take more than one generation to change.

And, although of course I don't condone any violence committed by Palestinians in any way, I mainly do blame consecutive Israeli governments for the most part.

Ever since the Oslo agreements (at least) they've played an insidious game of seemingly being willing to accord xyz to the Palestinians, push a solution forward, giving them hope, only to turn around not much later to do something really outrageous which in turn would provoke the Palestinians into reacting with violence. Then of course Israel could turn around to the international community & say "See, we've told you so, can't trust them, and we don't feel obliged to keep to the recent accords now...etc". (As far as I can remember, Israel has not kept to a single 'peace agreement' ever meeted out... )

De Facto, Israel has waged a continuous war of "psychologiocal" attrition against Palestine, systematically pushing these people over the edge, again & again & again, radicalising them more & more in the process. Disgusting.

[Moon Monkey]

Some of them did in 1948, but that was it. Another powerful motivator for them to leave was events like the Deir Yessin Massacre in the 1948 War.

Israelis who aren't in complete denial over the Palestinian issue should be more worried about this. The settlers are making it increasingly difficult to pull out from the West Bank, since they are not only politically active, but they are also generally armed (not enough to challenge the IDF, but enough to make a politically unacceptable scene). You know what that means? That means that at some point, the Palestinians in the West Bank are going to say "**** it", and start pushing for a one-state solution where they get equal citizenship rights in Greater Israel. Olmert has more or less said the same thing.

For every Deir Yassin there is a Hebron or Kfar Etzion, thats chicken and the egg. Just leave the settlers where they are if they won't move, like you say they are all armed and its not worth losing one 18 year old conscript in removing them, maybe send in a EU force or bring down those fantastic UNIFIL holidaymakers. However as the article said its just a few hundred diehards, most settlers will happily take the cash and move into Israel as many were immigrants offered cheap mortgages. The one-state solution won't wash, even most Israeli-arabs, one of whom is sat next to me right now, don't want that.

Ever since the Oslo agreements (at least) they've played an insidious game of seemingly being willing to accord xyz to the Palestinians, push a solution forward, giving them hope, only to turn around not much later to do something really outrageous which in turn would provoke the Palestinians into reacting with violence. Then of course Israel could turn around to the international community & say "See, we've told you so, can't trust them, and we don't feel obliged to keep to the recent accords now...etc". (As far as I can remember, Israel has not kept to a single 'peace agreement' ever meeted out... )

Something outrageous ? Examples ? Like in Gaza where they provoked them by completely removing all bases and settlements and watched radicalism and rocket attacks multiply ten-fold ? Israel has kept two successful peace agreements, one with Egypt and one with Jordan, however they are not dealing with sensible governments this time. To be honest I don't think you have been watching the situation as closely as you think you have, an awful lot more goes on than is reported outside Israel.

[Pandora.]

Something outrageous ? Examples ? Like in Gaza where they provoked them by completely removing all bases and settlements and watched radicalism and rocket attacks multiply ten-fold ? Israel has kept two successful peace agreements, one with Egypt and one with Jordan, however they are not dealing with sensible governments this time. To be honest I don't think you have been watching the situation as closely as you think you have, an awful lot more goes on than is reported outside Israel.

I was referring to peace agreements betw. Israel & Palestine, e.g. Oslo, Roadmap to Peace, etc.

I see that you're living in Israel, so I'm sure you have a much closer insight on the whole thing than myself. Nevertheless, I stand by my statement. I've also said clearly that I do not condone Palestinian violence & I certainly don't see them solely as hapless victims.

The Gaza withdrawal (unilateral disingagement plan) was done by Sharon for tactical purposes, not peace-furthering ones.

"Le monde politique" on Sharon & the unilateral disingagement plan:

The unprecedented unilateral withdrawal from Gaza was a step towards this new form of Israeli hegemony over Palestine. Although primarily strategic, it also had a tactical bonus. Sharon started the pullout because he felt isolated. At home, the public was weary of the conflict. Abroad, the International Court of Justice had in July 2004 declared the wall illegal and ordered its destruction, a demand supported later that month by the United Nations General Assembly by 150 votes to six, with 10 abstentions......

.....“The significance of the disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process,” said Sharon’s closest adviser, Dov Weissblas. “When you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Disengagement supplies the amount of formaldehyde that is necessary so there will not be a political process with the Palestinians” source

[Moon Monkey]

I was referring ......

It seems the israelis are damned if they do, damned if they don't. They pull out of Lebanon as everyone wanted and fundamentalism takes over and rocket attacks start, they pull out of Gaza and fundamentalism takes over and rocket attacks start ( and to be told that this withdrawal is no good because it was for the wrong reasons )....now why would there be a rush to pull out of the West Bank and watch the coastal cities and only airport come into easy range ?.

What peace-furthering do you think they should do, remembering that it is fundamentalist nutcases with Israels destruction as a cornerstone of their idealogy that are the 'peace partners' ? The checkpoints were relaxed for Ramadan and what happens, people are killed and wounded.

I still don't see whats 'outrageous' about withdrawing and disengaging from Gaza.Whether the reason be tactical or 'peace-furthering' they have the possibility of establishing the first part of a palestinian state and they chose Hamas to govern it.

Edited October 3, 2008 by Moon Monkey

[Guardsman Bass]

For every Deir Yassin there is a Hebron or Kfar Etzion, thats chicken and the egg. Just leave the settlers where they are if they won't move, like you say they are all armed and its not worth losing one 18 year old conscript in removing them, maybe send in a EU force or bring down those fantastic UNIFIL holidaymakers. However as the article said its just a few hundred diehards, most settlers will happily take the cash and move into Israel as many were immigrants offered cheap mortgages. The one-state solution won't wash, even most Israeli-arabs, one of whom is sat next to me right now, don't want that.

That's what they are effectively going to end up with, though, if they keep up the settlement patterns. They'll end up with the West Bank being a swiss cheese of Israeli settlements and Palestinian areas separated by roads guarded by the IDF, at which point getting a separate Palestinian state in the West Bank will be next to politically impossible.

The US could probably help here a lot. If we helped put up the money to buy out most of the settlers, as you said, or if we offered to help cover the cost of compensating Palestinians in the West Bank in exchange for taking the "right of return" off the table, it would go a long way towards making the two-state solution possible, at least in the West Bank.

[stevewinn]

Has any nation ever proposed a military peacekeeping force to be sent to Palestine?

Edited October 3, 2008 by stevewinn

[questionmark]

Has any nation ever proposed a military peacekeeping force to be sent to Palestine?

Has been proposed but always voted down.

[stevewinn]

Has been proposed but always voted down.

Can you remember who put the proposals forward?

[questionmark]

Can you remember who put the proposals forward?

The last time the Arab Summit in 2000, vetoed by the good 'ol US of A in the same year.

[MasterPo]

Has any nation ever proposed a military peacekeeping force to be sent to Palestine?

There was a UN "peace keeping force" between Israel and Lebanon in the 80's. I was there and I saw the DMZ.

Didn't stop the PLO from firing artilery into Israel almost every day. Not until Israel herself went in kicked out the PLO.